Role of inoculum and mutant frequency on fosfomycin MIC discrepancies by agar dilution and broth microdilution methods in Enterobacteriaceae

Clinical Microbiology and Infection

Volumn 23, Issue 5, 2017, Pages 325-331

  Ballestero Tellez M ^a,b   Docobo Perez F ^b,c,d   Rodriguez Martinez J M ^b,c,d   Conejo, M C ^c   Ramos Guelfo, M S ^a   Blazquez J ^b,d   Rodriguez Bano J ^a,b,c,d   Pascual, A ^a,b,c,d  

^a HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO VIRGEN MACARENA   (Spain)

^b HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO VIRGEN DEL ROCÍO   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SEVILLE   (Spain)

^d INSTITUTO DE SALUD CARLOS III   (Spain)

Author keywords

Bacterial subpopulation; Fosfomycin; Heteroresistance; Mutant frequency; Susceptibility test

Indexed keywords

AGAR; ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT; FOSFOMYCIN;

CHEMISTRY; CULTURE MEDIUM; DRUG EFFECTS; ENTEROBACTERIACEAE; ESCHERICHIA COLI; KLEBSIELLA PNEUMONIAE; MICROBIAL SENSITIVITY TEST; MULTIDRUG RESISTANCE;

AGAR; ANTI-BACTERIAL AGENTS; CULTURE MEDIA; DRUG RESISTANCE, MULTIPLE, BACTERIAL; ENTEROBACTERIACEAE; ESCHERICHIA COLI; FOSFOMYCIN; KLEBSIELLA PNEUMONIAE; MICROBIAL SENSITIVITY TESTS;

EID: 85011371241     PISSN: 1198743X     EISSN: 14690691     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2016.12.022     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. [1] Gupta, K., Hooton, T.M., Naber, K.G., Wullt, B., Colgan, R., Miller, L.G., et al. International clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of acute uncomplicated cystitis and pyelonephritis in women: a 2010 update by the infectious diseases society of America and the European society for microbiology and infectious diseases. Clin Infect Dis 52 (2011), e103–e120.
2. [2] Gardiner, B.J., Mahony, A.A., Ellis, A.G., Lawrentschuk, N., Bolton, D.M., Zeglinski, P.T., et al. Is fosfomycin a potential treatment alternative for multidrug-resistant gram-negative prostatitis?. Clin Infect Dis 58 (2014), e101–e105.
3. [3] Rosso-Fernandez, C., Sojo-Dorado, J., Barriga, A., Lavin-Alconero, L., Palacios, Z., Lopez-Hernandez, I., et al. Fosfomycin versus meropenem in bacteraemic urinary tract infections caused by extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli (FOREST): study protocol for an investigator-driven randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open, 5, 2015 e007363–e007363.
4. [4] Docobo-Pérez, F., Drusano, G.L., Johnson, A., Goodwin, J., Whalley, S., Ramos-Martín, V., et al. Pharmacodynamics of fosfomycin: insights into clinical use for antimicrobial resistance. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 59 (2015), 5602–5610.
5. [5] Hirsch, E.B., Raux, B.R., Zucchi, P.C., Kim, Y., McCoy, C., Kirby, J.E., et al. Activity of fosfomycin and comparison of several susceptibility testing methods against contemporary urine isolates. Int J Antimicrob Agents 46 (2015), 642–647.
6. [6] Kaase, M., Szabados, F., Anders, A., Gatermann, S.G., Fosfomycin susceptibility in carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae from Germany. J Clin Microbiol 52 (2014), 1893–1897.
7. [7] Falagas, M.E., Maraki, S., Karageorgopoulos, D.E., Kastoris, A.C., Mavromanolakis, E., Samonis, G., Antimicrobial susceptibility of multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) Enterobacteriaceae isolates to fosfomycin. Int J Antimicrob Agents 35 (2010), 240–243.
8. [8] Li, Y., Zheng, B., Li, Y., Zhu, S., Xue, F., Liu, J., Antimicrobial susceptibility and molecular mechanisms of fosfomycin resistance in clinical Escherichia coli isolates in mainland China. PLoS One, 10, 2015, e0135269.
9. [9] Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically; approved standard—ninth edition. CLSI document M07–A9. 2012, Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
10. [10] Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; twenty-fourth informational supplement. CLSI document M100–S25. 2015, Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
11. [11] López-Cerero, L., de Cueto, M., Díaz-Guerrero, M.A., Morillo, C., Pascual, A., Evaluation of the Etest method for fosfomycin susceptibility of ESBL-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae. J Antimicrob Chemother 59 (2007), 810–812.
12. [12] de Cueto, M., López, L., Hernández, J.R., Morillo, C., Pascual, A., In vitro activity of fosfomycin against extended-spectrum-β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae: comparison of susceptibility testing procedures. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 50 (2006), 368–370.
13. [13] Walsh, C.C., McIntosh, M.P., Peleg, A.Y., Kirkpatrick, C.M., Bergen, P.J., In vitro pharmacodynamics of fosfomycin against clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Antimicrob Chemother 70 (2015), 3042–3050.
14. [14] Engel, H., Gutiérrez-Fernández, J., Flückiger, C., Martínez-Ripoll, M., Mühlemann, K., Hermoso, J.A., et al. Heteroresistance to fosfomycin is predominant in streptococcus pneumoniae and depends on the murA1 gene. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 57 (2013), 2801–2808.
15. [15] VanScoy, B.D., McCauley, J., Ellis-Grosse, E.J., Okusanya, O.O., Bhavnani, S.M., Forrest, A., et al. Exploration of the pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic relationships for fosfomycin efficacy using an in vitro infection model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 59 (2015), 7170–7177.
16. [16] Murray, P.R., Niles, A.C., Heeren, R.L., Comparison of a highly automated 5-h susceptibility testing system, the Cobas–Bact, with two reference methods: Kirby–Bauer disk diffusion and broth microdilution. J Clin Microbiol 25 (1987), 2372–2377.
17. [17] Bland, J.M., Altman, D.G., Comparing methods of measurement: why plotting difference against standard method is misleading. Lancet 346 (1995), 1085–1087.
18. [18] Landis, J.R., Koch, G.G., The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 1977, 159.
19. [19] El-Halfawy, O.M., Valvano, M.A., Antimicrobial heteroresistance: an emerging field in need of clarity. Clin Microbiol Rev 28 (2015), 191–207.
20. [20] Claeys, K.C., Lagnf, A.M., Hallesy, J.A., Compton, M.T., Gravelin, A.L., Davis, S.L., et al. Pneumonia caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus – does vancomycin heteroresistance matter?. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2016 AAC.02388–15.
21. [21] Hernan, R.C., Karina, B., Gabriela, G., Marcela, N., Carlos, V., Angela, F., Selection of colistin-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii isolates in postneurosurgical meningitis in an intensive care unit with high presence of heteroresistance to colistin. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 65 (2009), 188–191.
22. [22] Nilsson, A.I., Berg, O.G., Aspevall, O., Kahlmeter, G., Andersson, D.I., Biological costs and mechanisms of fosfomycin resistance in Escherichia coli. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 47 (2003), 2850–2858.
23. [23] Diez-Aguilar, M., Morosini, M.-I., del Campo, R., Garcia-Castillo, M., Zamora, J., Canton, R., In vitro activity of fosfomycin against a collection of clinical Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from 16 Spanish hospitals: establishing the validity of standard broth microdilution as susceptibility testing method. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 57 (2013), 5701–5703.
24. [24] Díez-Aguilar, M., Martínez-García, L., Cantón, R., Morosini, M.I., In vitro susceptibility testing of fosfomycin in Pseudomonas aeruginosa, do we need a new standard for diffusion methods?. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2015 AAC.02237–15.